The Tale of Two Churches

From the INTRODUCTION to: The Tale of Two Churches As I began to prepare this book, one of my parishioners asked me what its title was. Since I didn’t have any thing in mind at that time, I could only answer that I was writing about the two systematic types of churches in the Christian faith today. After looking at me with a blank stare he said, “Why not just call it the tale of two churches?” The title has stuck in my mind, so with thanks to that fine man, here is The Tale of Two Churches. In these pages I will offer experiences of churches and individuals who are being transformed into a something new. The examples are evidence of a new mission of the universal (holy catholic) church. The examples offered here are true, but some of the names have been changed or omitted to protect privacy. Also, my opinions are based on my experience and are not offered to change anyone’s mind, but rather to encourage honest debate among faithful Christians. My purpose is to stimulate thought about the emergence of a new missionary movement to which the church is being called. The two churches offered in these pages are not defined by denomination or even by theology. They are not defined by style of worship. These things are the diversity of the holy catholic church, not the two churches I intend to discuss. There are many styles of congregations included in each of the two churches that I call the churches of our times. At first glance, these days, one could make a good argument that the two churches are born-again evangelical and socially liberal. The so-called, Christian right and the progressive liberal churches are the ones making all the headlines. The truth is that most people in our churches today do not fall into either of these two camps. In the 2008 U.S. elections, for example, young supposedly conservative evangelicals voted for many liberal candidates and supported some traditionally liberal issues. On the other hand, older members of what are considered liberal churches voted for conservative candidates. Of course, there are exceptions, and that is the point. There are individuals who are social conservatives and fiscal liberals; and visa-versa. The polar extremes of these two groups get all the press, but in fact the people are not divided by clear lines. They do not define the two types of churches I will offer here. When I refer to liberals and conservatives in the church I am speaking of the standard understanding of the use of those terms in society today. Those in the pews of main-line Protestant churches are more conservative than liberal, but most clergy are somewhat liberal. Congregational research in several 2008 denominational studies shows that the clergy, particularly in main-line churches, are more liberal than their people. Even among evangelical clergy there is a growing liberalism, particularly in support of human rights. One ecumenical study group I attended came to the conclusion that what divides conservatives and liberals in the church these days is the altar rail. For decades liberal leaders of most denominations have been choosing liberal candidates for ordination and then educating them at mostly liberal seminaries. Meanwhile, it has been my experience, that the person in the pew is asking the question, what has happened to my church? While all of this has been going on, no one seems to be watching the store. Liberal political and social issues have taken the church’s attention. The issues of the church’s mission, particularly evangelism and outreach are often going unattended. As for the people, they just want to be faithful and pray to God. Often they feel abandoned by the church they once knew and are searching for something new. The two churches that I will explore are defined by the way they live out the Christian faith. They represent two distinct systems within the context of many styles. One church is self centered, the other is Christ centered. Survival is the concern of the self centered, mission and ministry is the calling of the Christ centered. The systemic differences are centered on the way people relate to each other in mission, how they understand the faith and how they reach out beyond their own doors. There are liberals and conservatives in both types. These two churches both have good and faithful Christians as members, but the latter has a mission. I call them, the old chapel church (OCC) and the emerging missionary church (EMC). The old chapel is the place where an individual prays; the emerging missionary church is the place where people pray together; and then go out into the world to do the work of the Body of Christ. People come to a chapel and go out from a mission. In these pages we will explore how this works. I refer to the missionary church as emerging, because it is a work in progress. It is in the process of finding its way to where God wants it to be. Of course, the church is always evolving as it is led by the Holy Spirit to do God’s will. The EMC is the new church of our times. It has similarities to mission churches throughout history, but today’s version is being called to face challenges never known before. It is emerging to bring godly order to the secular chaos in our rapidly changing world. Things like multi-cultured societies, inter -dependant world economics, instant global communications and ethnic and tribal hatred are things the OCC never knew. The very future of the Christian Church depends on the journey, or transformation, form the old to the new. The pages of this book are a journal of this transformation and the hope that the new mission gives all Christians.